MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

NATURAL TRANSMISSION OF<i>CRYPTOSPORIDIUM PARVUM</i>BETWEEN DAMS AND CALVES ON A DAIRY FARM

2000· article· en· W2172398255 on OpenAlexaff
G M Faubert, Y. Litvinsky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parasitology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySte. Anne's Hospital
FundersNational Science Council
KeywordsBarnCryptosporidium parvumFecesBiologyVeterinary medicineCryptosporidiumAnimal scienceTransmission (telecommunications)MicrobiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transmission of Cryptosporidium parvum between dams and their respective calves was studied. For this purpose, fecal specimens taken from the rectum of preparturient, parturient, and postparturient dams were analyzed for C. parvum oocysts. Fecal specimens were taken from the newborn calf 4 hr after birth. Because the environment can be a source of contamination to the animals, specimens taken from inside and outside the barn were analyzed. The sucrose concentration method together with the Zielh-Nielsen acid-fast staining method were employed to increase the chances of oocyst detection. We are reporting that at parturition, the dams shed a higher number of oocysts by comparison to the preparturient and postparturient periods. Neonates acquire the infection at birth mainly because of the high number of oocysts shed by the dams at parturition. The management practice of moving calves 4 hr after birth away from the dams and the barn reduces the number of clinical cases because they are no longer in contact with an environment that is highly contaminated. We hypothesize that the increase in the number of oocysts sheds by dams at parturition might be due to a depression of the T helper 1-type of immune response during that period.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ParasitologySame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207